Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 295

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Direct Estimation of the Mitochondrial DNA Mutation Rate in Drosophila melanogaster

Open access
Haag-Liautard, Cathy, Coffey, Nicole, Houle, David, Lynch, Michael, Charlesworth, Brian, Keightley, Peter D·2008·PLoS Biology

Abstract

Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) variants are widely used in evolutionary genetics as markers for population history and to estimate divergence times among taxa. Inferences of species history are generally based on phylogenetic comparisons, which assume that molecular evolution is clock-like. Between-species comparisons have also been used to estimate the mutation rate, using sites that are thought to evolve neutrally. We directly estimated the mtDNA mutation rate by scanning the mitochondrial genome of Drosophila melanogaster lines that had undergone approximately 200 generations of spontaneous mutation accumulation (MA). We detected a total of 28 point mutations and eight insertion-deletion (indel) mutations, yielding an estimate for the single-nucleotide mutation rate of 6.2 x 10(-8) per site per fly generation. Most mutations were heteroplasmic within a line, and their frequency distribution suggests that the effective number of mitochondrial genomes transmitted per female per generation is about 30. We observed repeated occurrences of some indel mutations, suggesting that indel mutational hotspots are common. Among the point mutations, there is a large excess of G-->A mutations on the major strand (the sense strand for the majority of mitochondrial genes). These mutations tend to occur at nonsynonymous sites of protein-coding genes, and they are expected to be deleterious, so do not become fixed between species. The overall mtDNA mutation rate per base pair per fly generation in Drosophila is estimated to be about 10x higher than the nuclear mutation rate, but the mitochondrial major strand G-->A mutation rate is about 70x higher than the nuclear rate. Silent sites are substantially more strongly biased towards A and T than nonsynonymous sites, consistent with the extreme mutation bias towards A+T. Strand-asymmetric mutation bias, coupled with selection to maintain specific nonsynonymous bases, therefore provides an explanation for the extreme base composition of the mitochondrial genome of Drosophila.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060204

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 44 references

Cited by

See all 295

Metadata

Authors
Haag-Liautard, C., Coffey, N., Houle, D., Lynch, M., Charlesworth, B., & Keightley, P. D.
Venue
PLoS Biology
Published
2008-08-19
Volume
6
Issue
8
Pages
e204
ISSN
  • 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-7885
OpenAlex
W2147322476
Cited by
295
References
44
FWCI
10.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Direct Estimation of the Mitochondrial DNA Mutation Rate in Drosophila melanogaster. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060204
The paper
Haag-Liautard, C., Coffey, N., Houle, D., Lynch, M., Charlesworth, B., & Keightley, P. D. (2008). Direct Estimation of the Mitochondrial DNA Mutation Rate in Drosophila melanogaster. PLoS Biology. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060204

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.